tv The Rachel Maddow Show MSNBC November 7, 2013 4:00am-5:00am EST
good evening, rachel. thanks to my friends for joining us this hour, as well. for a hot minute in the commonwealth of virginia, not long after the civil war there was a political party called the readjuster party. the democratic party, which was conservative and racist, at the time had been the dominant force in virginia politics for a long time. they were always opposite the republican party or the whig party, depending on the year. but at the other moment, the party challenging the democrats and in fact winning the governorship of virginia, it was not the whigs or the democrats, it was the re-adjuster. i bet there was a thesis of the lost re-adjuster party. i bet i could just google it.
he made history, not just because his strange, now forgotten party won that high office. he made history because his time in the state house, his time of governor of virginia in the 1880s, that was the last time that any party in virginia was only able to hold the governorship for one term. before last night, no party in virginia had been turfed out of the governorship after only one term in office since 1995. just in terms of politics, the republican party lose the governorship of virginia is almost historically unbelievable. bob mcdonnell winning the governorship and having to give it back after just one term, that never happens in virginia. that never happens in well over a century. but it is also amazing that virginia will have a democratic governor at the same time we have a democratic president in the country. that never happens either. since 1977, virginia voters have been very, very careful to always elect a governor who was the opposite party of the
president. except last night. virginia picked a democratic governor at the same time that we have got a democratic president. the state has not done that in 36 years. ken cuccinelli and the republican party losing the virginia governorship last night just broke the mold, historically. and when you look at the data about who actually turned out in virginia, this is a much more worrying story for republicans in general than it is for just this one losing candidate in this one losing rate last night. republicans like to think they have sort of a structural advantage in a state like virginia because it votes for its officials in the off-off election like the one in 2009. when you vote in other years that means you get fewer people turning out to vote. and when fewer people turn out to vote, the electorate turns out to be republican, and that of course is good for republican candidates. so look at these numbers in virginia, the last time virginia elected a governor, it was 2009.
this was the electorate that turned out that year. republicans, 37%, democrats, 33. so that was the off-year election, the last time they elected the governor where they had an advantage of four points, in 2012, it was a different story. it was a presidential election year, you got more people turning out. when you get more people turning out the electorate gets more democratic, the republicans were 32% that year, the democrats 39, so that was a seven-point democratic advantage in terms of just who turned out to vote in virginia. republicans look at a history like that and it is a pretty consistent history. and it is not hard to see them hoping that the electorate doesn't look like a presidential year. they want a smaller turnout and a more republican turnout. they want the electorate to look like the last time they elected a governor, one of these odd, off year elections.
well, look at the turnout last night, it was just slightly more independent than it was by 2012, by a hair, by one point. the democrats had a huge turnout advantage over the republicans that they would have had in a presidential year. democrats were plus-7, when president obama got elected last year. and they were there. last night, when terry mcauliffe won the governorship. if you get presidential election type turnout in virginia, from here on out in all of their elections, republicans will never win again in that state. look specifically at the african-american turnout. when the republicans won that governorship back in 2009, the black turnout was 16%. when president obama was on the ballot last year, black turnout turned up to 20% of the electorate. last night again, black turnout was 20% of the electorate. african-american voters in virginia turned out. even though it was not a presidential year. even though it was an off-off year. and if african-american voters
can turn out like that again in every election in virginia, that is a nightmare for the republican party. so yeah, ken cuccinelli lost, and the republicans lost the governorship. both of those are history-defying, bad news, bad bench marks for the republican party. and who turned out, looks bad for virginia republicans not just for last night's race but for every race going forward in that state. and in the face of the terrible news for the republican party, the republicans have decided they are not sweating it. they are not bummed or worried. they don't see a problem with what happened in virginia last night. and you can see it both in their attitudes and plans about what they will do going forward. in terms of the attitude. i mean, there is no ambiguity about the race, no question about whether or not terry mcauliffe won. but ken cuccinelli reportedly never called the man he lost to.
"the washington post" says that cuccinelli has no plans to ever call terry mcauliffe to formally concede or congratulate him on his win. that is in terms of the attitude. in terms of the plan, though, republicans never seem to make a course collection. you may remember even in the reporting of the results coming out from virginia, you already hear the lament from republicans. that they actually could have had a candidate that could have won easily over terry mcauliffe. this guy could have won, the republican lieutenant governor, bill bowling, a sort of main stream republican in virginia who was well liked. he probably could have won if he had been on the ballot instead of ken cuccinelli. but the reason he was not on the ballot and ken cuccinelli was, is because ken cuccinelli, the tea party guys and the hard right guys out maneuvered them.
they picked their choice at a convention, instead of putting it to a vote nation wide. that let them pick their fire and brim stone right-hard choice. that is how you got him instead of bill bowling as the republican candidate for governor. that is how you got a guy like e. j. bowling. the republican's only hope statewide, is too close to call. even after what happened last night, the republican party is making no plans to change that system on how they pick their candidates. they could go back to the old system and choose their candidates in the primary instead of just at a meeting. but they're sticking with the "jut at a meeting" plan, sticks
with the convention plan, it could go back to that old system of choosing the candidate at a primary, but they're not doing it. they're going to pick the same system to pick the person running against mike warner. why change, right? everything worked out so great. there are a lot of things that come out in the news where you realize the republican party is really kind of in its own world that doesn't have interaction with the rest of the world. today, the right is actually carrying on as if in their mind, they kind of won virginia. as if ken cuccinelli's losing virginia, if you look at it the right way was pretty much a republican victory. sort of. been a weird day. >> tonight, you sent a message to the president of the united states that you believe that
virginia understands that obama care is a failure. >> remember, this is the guy who lost. but he is saying his loss sent a message that obama care is so terrible, virginia thinks obama care is so terrible that that is why they voted for the guy who likes obama care. this is some of the weirdest spin i have ever seen out of an election loss. but it is not just coming from the scottsdale. this is the right's understanding of what happened last night in virginia, they are totally going for it. >> obama care actually could have been the reason that cuccinelli had a late surge. >> did obama care turn a runway course into one that nearly cost the democrat's election in virginia last night? >> obama care could throw a scare into some democrats. >> yes, they did seek to make the governor's election a referendum on obama care. and then anti-obama care side lost, right? you know that they -- our friends on the fox news channel
have been whacking away at this all day trying to turn the republicans losing the governorship in virginia into a bad thing for democrats. specifically a bad thing for health reform. but the fact is, last night, virginia against all historical odds elected a democrat. not a republican, they elected a democrat who specifically promised to expand health reform in the state. today, president obama went to texas, of all places to talk about expanding health reform in that state. texas has more uninsured people in the state in the country by a mile. and the republican-controlled state government in texas are making sure that the access to obama care are as hard as possible to access for people who live in texas. it is provocative seeing president obama going down to texas to see rick perry, to see how the republicans have done so wrong by the people in their own
state. the republicans in texas have not been able to help the people in texas. but the federal government is controlled by a democratic president. and he would like to offer some help if only the republicans would let him. that is a provocative political stance for the president today. but substantively on the issue of health reform and the politics of health reform, there is something going on. the media, i think broadly, the beltway media and the national media have not caught on to yet. it may explain the republicans' sort of willful denial that they actual lost last night in virginia. over the first few weeks that the health reform exchanges were over, over the first few weeks of the health reform implementation, it was really
difficult, the gallup poll shows over the first few weeks of obama care, america's view of health care reform became slightly more positive. supposed to be a disastrous result, but the gallup poll and the washington post poll, showed that health reform held steady or even ticked up a little bit in public esteem after the first few disastrous weeks. after the media could settle full-time on the result, after the coverage of terrible, terrible obama care, the poll numbers according to a new reuters report, weirdly, the support keeps going up. overall, the support for health care reform has gone up a little bit. among the americans who don't have health insurance, their approval of the affordable care act is going up. their disapproval is going down. again, this is in the middle of
the fire hose coverage of how terrible health reform is, how terrible it is, you could possibly imagine. how people are looking forward to use the new law to get health insurance has gone from 37% last month to 42% this month. the poll numbers on obama care are going up. which is absolutely inexplicable if you only look at the beltway media. yeah, the conservative media, but pretty much the whole national media is following their lead on talking about just how terrible this is, to the exclusion of everything else about it. they're talking about it in a way that is individually design to do transit bad news story about what some don't like about health care reform, into political disapproval of the president and democrats. that is the message from the national press which makes no sense when you look at the polls. what is driving the polls up when all of the media pressure should be pushing them down?
maybe the answer to that can only be found in the local press, in the local news. in these little human interest stories about people's actual individual lives and how they are actually individually affected by this policy. maybe the beltway press is not ready to admit it yet. but maybe there are political consequences, not just for the things that are wrong with health reform, but also the things that are right with it. >> 57-year-old gail roach said she couldn't believe what she was hearing when she was told she could have health insurance under the affordable care act, and when she applied for subsidies, her rate was cut again. >> a dollar and 11 cents. >> roach received help using the federal website from a group called "enroll america". >> obviously, we don't want everybody to think they're going to get health insurance for a dollar a month. >> we spoke to the spokesperson through a face time interview.
he said gail has it right. it is possible she will only have to pay a dollar a month for the most basic insurance offered. >> based upon her income and family size, the tax credits that are available to help a sister with the premium payment would in fact make her payment what she told you it is, a dollar a month. >> but it is also important to people to realize her situation is very rare. >> this is very unique, we haven't come across anybody else who was able to purchase this plan for a dollar. but just from looking at the model it is possible that other people may find similar savings. >> that is local coverage from pittsburgh. and this is representative of the way good news stories about health reform are covered, right? you see this stuff in almost human interest reporting terms, being reported as a curiosity that we found locally. not something that has political consequences.
all the bad news about obama care will shape the national consequences of this law. but the good news? this is fascinating. totally counter to the actual narrative. but it is actually people's lived experiences. you see it in pittsburgh, kentucky, you see it in maine where people really want to sign up. interest is high. you see it in oregon, where people are signing up in a hurry. you see it in states like bright red oklahoma. and tennessee, people who are eligible to buy health insurance under the now law. republicans convinced themselves they have done nothing wrong politically this year, that nothing needs to change. that even the races they're losing, they're technically winning, because they're against obama care. that is all you need, just sit back and reap the political rewards. we are three days into the implementation and the polling is what it is. the national press and the conservative press and the
republicans say it is terrible and getting worse. and americans, on the other hand, are kind of starting to like it more and more every day. one day after this historic loss last night in virginia is a weird time for republicans to be oh, so cock sure that they need to do nothing else but to be against obama care. one day after this race is a little too soon to be cock sure. nice to have you here. >> thank you. >> so the republicans insist even against the evidence of losing that governorship last night that they can win all over the country by running against obama care. the polls, to me, seem inconclusive. but if anything, to be going the other direction. how do you see it? >> i see it exactly the way you see it. and let me tell you the other really important number. only 24% of the people want to repeal obama care, and not replace it with anything.
another 13% want to repeal it and replace it with the republican alternative. and then 22% of the people actually want to expand it. there is only a quarter of the people who want to get rid of this thing. most people want to make it work because they know how serious it is to have affordable health insurance. moreover, that 20% has been the same for two years. this so-called botched introduction, well, real people want to see it fixed but they also want to see what real opportunities are provided for them. and every day, it gets better. my own small business, we've already gotten a rebate and a notice that we were supposed to notify all the employees that now they have birth control with no co-pays. it is considered preventive care. we already have two positives with obama care. >> can you tell us what races are actually seen with a referendum on obama care, which the republicans were so eager to brand that governor's race in virginia, even though they lost?
>> that is right, even though they lost. i tell you, the virginia races, i think, were a referendum on the shutdown. and what people couldn't believe is that the republicans would shut down the entire government over obama care. and for fact, we went into richmond, and we did four focus groups of people, all who were independents and republicans, not necessarily pro obama care. they had been seeing ads against obama care. and we asked them, do you think the government should be shut down against obama care? and they said are you kidding? absolutely not. this is reckless, let's get going. they didn't say we love obama care, they just said let's get going, let's try this thing. americans want to move forward and fix the website. for goodness sake, we sent a person to the moon. we can fix this website, let's get going. i will say what i think is the
most sinister thing, which is what the insurance companies are starting to do, which is falsely say they're knocking people off their plans because of obama care. and we as democrats have to aggressively respond to that. because that is outrageous, that is not true. and we need to call out the carpet and say the insurance companies would blame everything, including the snowstorm on obama care. that is not what is happening. >> celinda lake, democratic pollsters, thank you for helping us understand what is happening. >> thank you. all right, a very busy day after election day, including a very funny error by vice president biden, and a big city mayor and chair of the democratic party. plus, senator rand paul's refusal, just gets deeper and deeper. stay tuned.
this is a bad week to be a person whose name is rob ford. >> yes, i have smoked crack cocaine. but no, do i -- am i an addict? no, have i tried it? probably in one of my drunken stupors. >> mexico city is the largest city, then new york, and los angeles, and then there is the city that this guy amazingly is still the mayor of right now. the guy who is admitting to the crack smoking thing that he denied for a long time. that he now says he did do. with that amazing thing going on
in the news, pity the many people, the more than a handful of people around the english-speaking world who also share with that mayor the relatively common name of rob ford. for example, quote, my twitter is blowing up, the mayor of toronto must be up to some shenanigans again, according to a totally different rob ford. and then there is this rob ford in england, saying tired of canadians accosting me with weird questions about crack pipes. to be fair, the problem with the crack cocaine is not just a problem with rob ford and canada. when walsh beat john connally, many made calls to congratulate walsh for the win. joe biden called, debbie wasserman schultz called. they all called, even a white house operator called looking to set up a call friend president obama and the new mayor-elect of boston, marty walsh, except they all called the wrong marty walsh.
see it turns out in boston there was a guy who was a staffer of ted kennedy's, who was another well-connected democrat. a political consultant whose name is also marty walsh. also apparently the mayor-elect marty walsh has a cousin who is also named marty walsh, who also got some of of the congratulations calls last night. but hey, it all worked out. in boston if you know a guy who knows a guy who knows a guy named marty walsh? that kind of just means you live that kind of just means you live in boston, no hard feelings. that's a good thing, but it doesn't cover everything. only about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you.
so consider an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement insurance plans, they pick up some of what medicare doesn't pay and could save you in out-of-pocket medical costs. call today to request a free decision guide to help you better understand what medicare is all about and which aarp medicare supplement plan works best for you. with these types of plans, you'll be able to visit any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients... plus, there are no networks, and virtually no referrals needed. there's a range of plans to choose from, too, and they all travel with you anywhere in the country. join the millions who have already enrolled in the only medicare supplement insurance plans endorsed by aarp... an organization serving the needs of people 50 and over for generations... and provided by unitedhealthcare insurance company,
which has over 30 years of experience behind it. ♪ call today. remember, medicare supplement insurance helps cover some of what medicare doesn't pay. expenses that could really add up. these kinds of plans could save you in out-of-pocket medical costs. you'll be able to choose any doctor who accepts medicare patients. and there are virtually no referrals needed. so don't wait. with all the good years ahead, look for the experience and commitment to go the distance with you. call now to request your free decision guide. this easy-to-understand guide will answer some of your questions and help you find the aarp medicare supplement plan that's right for you.
in boston, no hard feelings.6 this is real money, not monopoly, this is a pile of money being thrown off the balance -- balcony, where people were rolling around in the free money. what that had to do with something that surprisingly failed at the polls last night on the west coast is coming up in just a moment. stay with us.
the overall margin of victory for democrat terry mcauliffe over ken cuccinelli in the governor's race was three points. but when you break out the exit polling it was the gender gap that really gave mcauliffe the win. he took the virginia lady vote, by nine points, 51-42. and he took the african-american
vote by an astonishing 81%, 91-7 among african-american women. but we kind of knew it was coming. ken cuccinelli is a life long and crusading social conservative activist. his record includes personally intervening in the state of virginia to shut down abortion clinics. it would likely ban the most popular forms of birth control. ken cuccinelli is the kind of candidate who said he expected god's wrath on america because american women are allowed to have abortions. so yeah, the polling last night showed that ken cuccinelli had big distance to make up in the polls with virginia women. to finish strong, therefore, to
make his last best efforts to win, to make the virginia women to give him a second chance, because that is what he needed. ken cuccinelli hit the trail with a roster of republican men that looked like a list for a "right to life" rally. this is the group he brought with him. anti-abortion republican senator guy, marco rubio. rand paul, anti-abortion republican guy rand paul, and anti-abortion republican governor guy bobby jindal, and anti-abortion rick santorum. and the anti-abortion family, the duggars, 19 kids and counting. there was another one brought in, a blast from the past. the long-time republican governor, scott walker. governor scott walker did not draw a particularly good crowd for ken cuccinelli in virginia
in the closing days of the campaign. but not for a lack of trying or a lack of congruant politics between the two men. governor scott walker is up for re-election next year. if he runs for election, as expected, that will be his third election in four years. the fight over union rights in the recall effort made wisconsin the center of the political universe for a while. governor walker surviving the effort. his win in the race made him a national republican darling. so now he pretty clearly is running for re-election in wisconsin. but also he is just as clearly apparently running for president. he has a running for president style book that is just out, titled "unintimidated" so you can hear the story of his awesome amazingness. and he will meet with the national republican donors who
right now are gearing up for the republican race. unintimidated, also, need money. but as governor scott walker dreams about new drapes in the oval office, they have gotten serious about unseating him from his day job. one democratic contender in wisconsin upped the ante significantly by signing up a bunch of a-list staffer, including two members of obama's key members. head of direct mail for one of president obama's campaigns have just signed on to work with wisconsin democratic hopeful mary burke as she tries to beat scott walker and become governor of that state. in very early polling mary burke is essentially tied with governor walker. that said, he has already beaten good democrats twice for the office he now holds.
what makes democrats believe they can turn it around a year from now, and how do his 2016 hopes interfere with that? joining me now, mary burke, who served as wisconsin's commerce secretary from 2005 to 2007. mary burke, thank you for joining us. >> well, thanks rachel. it is a pleasure to be here. >> does it matter to wisconsin -- should it matter to governor walker's re-election effort if he is in fact running for the republican presidential nomination for 2016 while he is also trying to be governor? should that matter? >> well, i think what the people of wisconsin care about is they have a governor focused on the issues that are most important to them. as i travel around the state, i hear people are most concerned about jobs. that the governor have that focus and are making it the priority. that they're doing all they can to move the state forward. you know, we have been lagging in terms of job creation since the recession. and i believe we can do better,
by bringing people together and considering the options and make sure we're focused on the ones that work. put problem-solving ahead of politics. >> wisconsin was the political center of the universe when governor walker moved so bluntly to strip union rights in the state. the reaction to that was in part, the policy, but also the confrontational way he did it. the move to strip him of power despite all the anger didn't succeed. how do you think the effort changed wisconsin politics? why do you think you can beat him now when the recall effort couldn't beat him before? >> well, i think it gets down to who you are in wisconsin. we are people who like to get along with each other. and we like to work together to move forward. as you mentioned, this was incredibly divisive. and i have heard that, as i moved through the state.
that will be a big campaign issue, is the type of leadership. is it the type of leadership that brings people together or the divisive leadership that we've seen over the last three years? >> women's rights, and reproductive rights have been a big issue in the last few years, and scott walker went after shutting down abortion clinics, and even went after equal pay. did those decisions have to do with your running against him? >> absolutely, i believe that women should have the freedom to make their own health care choices. and what the governor has done is roll back wisconsin many, many years. and so i think it is important this we're able to make those choices.
i was encouraged to have planned parenthood's endorsement today. but also we'll focus on the issues that matter the most to people of wisconsin, which are jobs. >> you did get an endorsement as you just said, a year out from the election. from planned parenthood. i read their endorsement. they're very focused on the policy changes in wisconsin. it is a bit of a signal that if you're a candidate against governor walker it will be a big high profile race. do you expect there to be a lot of station attention, a lot of national outside groups weighing in on the sort of attention that wisconsin politics has gotten in the past few years? >> well, i wouldn't be surprised. i think no doubt governor walker has made himself a national tea party figure. and that will bring attention. but i think the election in the end will be about what the people of wisconsin care about. whether they have leadership that is focused on the issue -- issues that are most important to them. i have a track record of 30 years, i worked and we increased
sales to over $50 million in just a few short years. then at the department of commerce, we had a 4.8% unemployment rate. and 84,000 more jobs than we have today. and then i got into education. i said how are we going to close the achievement gap? and i created a partnership that brought together the boy's and girl's club and the madison public schools. so that high schoolers who would be the first to graduate from their families were on that path and could realize their dreams. and i think that is what the wisconsin voters care about, they care about leadership and setting the priorities that are most important to them. and that is what i will do when i run the race. >> mary burke, candidate for the democratic party, wisconsin governor. it is nice to have you here, ma'am, good luck to you.
one of the most interesting things that happened in d.c. was this moment, in the big office where the government does its work. is the thousand and one dollar bills that activists threw off the balcony of the senate offers building, and then others just rolled around in the dollar bills like it was snow. that was a protest at the senate. and people involved in throwing the money that day and rolling around in it got arrested. turns out one of the guys arrested there was the sort of activist-in-chief for the tingly soap company, dr. bronners, you know, the doctor that has an excellent sense of humor. josh harkins at mother jones reported that he got involved in one election. as you see there on the label for the soap, dr. bronner took the side on 522, a washington
ballot measure where products taken from genetically modified organizations should be labelled as such. they had money on their side, too, including the dr. bronner's money, which is just some of the money that flowed in washington. look at how the money breaks down in that race. these numbers are from "the seattle times." the side that wants to label genetically labelled stuff raised about $8 million, with about 70% of it raised out of state. sounds like a lot, right? look at the other side, the don't label side. the we don't want to know side, they raised $22 million, and they raised all of it from out of state. actually, i should modify that. of the $22 million they raised,
they raised $550 in washington state. not $550,000, $550 out of 22 million, which means that pie is not to scale. 10,000 people from across washington state contributed to the yes, contributed to the yes on labelling side. basically, nobody from washington state contributed to the no on labelling side. but the no side had such a huge tide of corporate money behind them, from bayer and dow agra sciences, and dupont, and basically no one was on the company's side in the fight. but those companies put so much money into it that they totally swamped the other side. and the modified food issue appears to have failed. it was dr. bronner and 10,000 donors across the state against coke and pepsi, yeah, the coke
and pepsi side looks like they probably won. there is a reason the companies knew that pouring out this money in washington state would be effective. that reason is called california. you might remember in 2012 elections that was a huge victory for progressives. california obviously voted for president obama. democrats in california within a 2/3 super majority in the state legislature that way. it wasn't just a victory for democrats, california voters overwhelmingly voted to raise income taxes to fund public education. they voted to ease up california's mandatory three strike sentencing law. a big night in california except for one big loss, heading into that november 2012 election when californians were asked if they support labeling genetically modified organisms, californians said yes by huge margins.
on the ballot, prop 37. and californians supported that kind of labeling by huge margins in the polls until ads like this started flooding the state. >> they would create a legal nightmare. this ill lodge gal unfair labeling proposition makes no sense and would increase costs for california farmers and food companies by over $1 billion a year. >> administering 37 complex regulations. >> the people who funded those were monsanto, pepsi, dupont, kraft foods. the same in washington state this year doing it in california last year. and the corporate side outraised the other side. 5:1. they dumped $50 million of advertising and campaigning to beating the labeling initiative in california. it worked in california last year.
it looks like it worked in washington this year. there was enough money to take something really, really popular in the state and make it lose on election day. take that you tingly soap hippies. for now, the pro-labeling folks in washington state have this message on their website after last night's election. washington state votes by mail. results take a long time to come in. they have not given up the fight yet. they say the ballots are coming in from parts of state where their message is strongest. hard to imagine, pro labeling side will make up the difference in the vie. we will see. if you are looking for a base line story how powerful corporate money scan be in elections, if you are looking for how industry can get what it wants by sheer power of overwhelming millions, despite the unpopularity of their cause, this fight in california last year and in washington state last night they both show how big money gets it done even in blue, blue states, even on blue, blue nights.
the front page of today's kentucky enquirer. at the top of the page there, my fault, senator paul says of plagiarism. this was the front page of off to day's lexington herald leader paper. paul to retool office after plagiarism charges. he is hopeful "it will make people leave me the hell alone." the front page of the currier journal in louisville, kentucky. paul admits his plagiarism quote is my fault. and that front page story on the front page of the currier journal was nothing compared to what the paper had to say on the editorial page. today the currier, published this scathing editorial. recent news accounts make it clear senator paul made a habit of using without attribution other people's words, thoughts and ideas. his reaction so far has not been
to plead guilty and beg forgiveness. that's not his style. he claimed to be the victim of a witch-hunt by hacks and haters. takes it as an insult to be accused. the real insult here, the paper says is that mr. paul would expect vote tires believe his half-baked, nutty explanations. the real insult he would expect to us believe he is not at fault and the result of partisan opponents. the biggest insult is that he would use a writer's or researcher's word, claim them as his own and expect everyone to look away when he gets caught. the terrible hometown press that rand paul is getting right now might explain why the senator is melting down over thor to. now come to the point where he is threatening to quit and leave politics altogether unless people stop criticizing him over his plagiarism problems.
and reporting on them. presumably. senator paul told "the new york times," to tell you the truth, people can think what they want the i can go back to being a doctor any time. if they're tired of me. i will go back to big a doctor and be perfectly content. senator paul, who the times described as drawn and clearly shaken during their interview with him, continued, what we are going to do from here forward if it will make people leave me the hell alone we well do them look college papers, try to put out footnotes. senator paul followed up that exasperated emotional sweary interview with the times yesterday with another one few day with the national review. senator paul described by interview at the nro as furious. and he says, to his interviewer, it annoys the hell out of me. if i could just go to detention after school for a couple days everything would be okay. do i have to be in detention for the rest of my career? >> one thing that is maybe underappreciated about this stressful episode happening at a key time in his career.
politico reported he met with rupert murdoch, chairman of news corps and the robert ailes, two king makers you need on your side, republican running for president. for republicans trying to make that run this is the time when the guys are trying to establish themselves as viable candidates, serious candidates. in the middle of all of this, rand paul is all but breaking down in these interviews. about these ongoing plagiarism revelations. not only can he not handle rigors of the difficult workload of beg a freshman senator, his excuse for plagiarizing an article for an op-ed, not only cannot handle the workload of a senator can't handle criticism of thing he's has done wrong. plagiarism has forced people out of political races in the past, joe biden in the 80s. in this case, rand paul says he might not be even make it to the race for president. he is now threatening quit even being a senator right now he cannot take the heat, cannot take the criticism.